"This is one of the first satellite images I had privately commissioned during the research phase of the Napo/Amazon confluence. I believe it is one of the most important pieces of data that I have collected. I invite people to comment on what they see and I will respond with my personal theory later...Thanks, Mike Warner"
Greg also asked me to release the picture below because "it will give a sense of scale to the one released originally."
Forgive me if I am wrong, but I think that those two images were taken at different times of year, possibly even of two different areas. The satellite image seems to show dark water with some very light areas which I think are white water rapids or waterfalls or similar, whereas the air photo is of a river that contains a lot of suspended sediment and is coloured muddy brown by this, and does not exhibit white water presumably because the features that were causing this during low water conditions are submerged below a metre or so of calmer water.
ReplyDeleteThe annoying thing here is that I cannot see any obvious large animal in either photo; I know that I am fairly poor at pattern recognition and will miss mostly hidden things, but I honestly cannot see a 40-meter snake or part thereof in either photo.
Can anyone help here?
The second photo merely gives the same sense of scale I got from the first anyway. All the Warners had to do is tell us how big the trees actually are.If the white water in the new pic is supposed to be the snake then it would seem to be about 300 feet long, and doesn't look like a snake any more than the mudbank did.
ReplyDeleteI've only just noticed the scale at bottom right - which would make the bright water/snake around 600feet long.It was sent to someone called Nicholas for enhancement, by someone called Paul-not Greg or Mike.It is 2 years old.Did the Warners actually take any of these photos themselves?
ReplyDelete